ArticleClinical transplantation2024
Attitudes Toward Use of an APOL1 Genetic Testing Chatbot in Living Kidney Donor Evaluation: A Focus Group Study.
Article in Clinical transplantation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence agents for biological research: a survey.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Contextual factors of implementing APOL1 genetic testing into living kidney donor clinical evaluation.Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLiving kidney donor (LKD) candidates of African ancestry are increasingly asked to undergo Apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1) genetic testing during the donor evaluation process to better understand their risk of kidney disease. LKD candidates' attitudes about using a clinical chatbot on APOL1 remain unknown. This study builds on prior work to culturally adapt the Gia (Genetic Information Assistant) chatbot on APOL1 by assessing donor, recipient, and community member attitudes about the Gia chatbot for enhancing the integration of APOL1 testing into the LKD clinical evaluation workflow.
methodsThis study involved focus groups and a post-focus group survey in two US cities about the APOL1 Gia chatbot. Qualitative data were analyzed via thematic analysis, and descriptive statistics were used for demographic data.
resultsWe conducted 10 focus groups including 54 participants (25 LKDs, 23 community members, and 6 living donor kidney transplant recipients of African ancestry). Five themes emerged: (1) participants supported LKD candidates using the Gia chatbot before the nephrologist clinic visit, (2) participants were interested in undergoing APOL1 testing after using Gia, (3) APOL1 testing costs may influence LKD candidates' willingness to get tested, (4) patients of African ancestry may hold varying preferences for using chatbots in the healthcare setting, and (5) individual-level barriers may limit the use of Gia in the healthcare setting.
conclusionsIndividuals of African ancestry were highly receptive to integrating the APOL1 chatbot into LKD candidate clinical evaluation, which bodes well for integrating chatbots into the APOL1 clinical genetic testing process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.